Huffman v. Bureau of Prisons et al

Filing 313

ORDER Adopting and Affirming 309 Report and Recommendations: 229 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, and this case is dismissed without prejudice. 224 Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiffs Motions for Preliminary Injunction, 297 and 306 , are denied as moot. By Judge Christine M. Arguello on 2/4/13.(dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01459-CMA-KLM
LORAL HUFFMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
DR. ALLRED,
DR. CARTER,
SANCHEZ, Case Manager,
DERR, Unit Manager,
JOHN DOE, Mailroom Supervisor,
JANE DOE, Food Supervisor,
BUCKNER, Investigator,
LINCOLN, D.H.O., and
CRANK, Trust Manager
Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING JANUARY 10, 2013
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on the January 10, 2013 Recommendation by
United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix that Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment (Doc. # 229) be granted, all other pending motions be denied as moot (Doc.
## 224, 297, 306), and that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. # 70) be dismissed
without prejudice. (Doc. # 309 at 14.) The Recommendation is incorporated herein
by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
The Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were
due within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation.
(Doc. # 309 at 14.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge Mix’s

Recommendation have been filed by either party. “In the absence of timely objection,
the district court may review a magistrate [judge’s] report under any standard it deems
appropriate.” Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (stating that “[i]t does not appear that Congress intended
to require district court review of a magistrate’s factual or legal conclusions, under
a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”).
The Court has reviewed all the relevant pleadings concerning Defendants’ Motion
for Summary Judgment and the Recommendation. Based on this review, the Court
concludes that Magistrate Judge Mix’s thorough and comprehensive analyses
and recommendations are correct and that “there is no clear error on the face of the
record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS
the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mix as the findings and conclusions of
this Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 309) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment
(Doc. # 229) is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 224) and
Plaintiff’s Motions for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. ## 297, 306) be DENIED AS MOOT.
This case is DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.
DATED: February

04

, 2013
BY THE COURT:

_______________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge
2